"We'll let the victims sue the people making porn of them!"
If the porn-makers can't be identified, what use is that? Why not just make it illegal, and thus the police's job to find and punish these people?
260 publicly visible posts • joined 14 Jun 2022
Pro tip: If someone tells you how much you are going to be paid and what work you are going to do, and you can't say no, then you're an employee, not a contractor.
This rule of thumb thus indicates that most doctors in America are employees of the insurance companies, not the hospitals/practices etc.
http://www.httpvshttps.com/
11 seconds on http, less than a second on https.
Yes, the real difference is that http can't use http/2... but that doesn't stop it from being the case that if you wanna go fast on the internet, you NEED https.
https://www.troyhunt.com/i-wanna-go-fast-https-massive-speed-advantage/
No, of course not.
But "did our ads load and show" which is the information they actually *want*, their check of "do you have an ad-blocker" is the wrong way to go about this - isn't that. And I'm worried that if YouTube takes off their Google hat for a minute and does this check without data-slurping, then the law will switch around to being on their side.
So, I think YouTube is doing a stupid here... *but*.
Blocking ads is legal - you're just choosing *not* to download something.
Blocking ad-blockers is also legal - you are allowed to make "View my ads" a condition of viewing the website, and try and enforce that.
Blocking ad-blocker-blockers is *not* legal, as you are now circumventing the "conditions of entry", as it were.
So I think that what YouTube is doing is user-hostile and they should definitely be using content-based advertising and massively ratcheting down the (download) size and interactivity of online ads as other people have said... but I'm worried that if they raise a stink about ad-blockers in a court somewhere, that they'll actually have a leg to stand on.
"Humanoid robots are touted to become the next disruptive thing after computers, smartphones and new energy vehicles"
Assuming they mean electric vehicles, have those actually disrupted anything? I thought the only thing they're a serious threat to would be a petrol station, and even then I'm assuming they'll pivot to being charging stations.